(Take two)
Actually, you didn't quote me. Or come close comprehending what was actually being discussed. Or really do much critical thinking at all. Those of us who have suffered through your recent posts are surely familiar with this reoccurring theme in your rantings.
See, I tried to be nice, tried to let it slide, but now I have to drop a DC Tom style slap down on you. (Said with the greatest reverence to DC of course).
Stick with me here. Keep your dictionary handy, try to sound out the big words. Focus. If you get lost, don't be afraid to raise your hand. It'll help. I promise.
Let's start with the original post ...
First thing you'll notice, no where in this post (or any other) did I use the word rape. Not once. Yet you quote me as using it a few times. Just to be clear, quoting someone means repeating what they said previously. So now we know that you don't really understand the language. It also clearly shows you're not really paying attention to the post but instead trying to slap your own agenda on the conversation. What that agenda is, other than a crusade against me, I have no idea.
Reading is about context. The context of the original post in this case was in reference to Cam Newton and his many vocal detractors -- both on this board and in the media. Those fans claiming he cannot become an elite QB because he has the most dreaded of curses: character issues. Posters have been adamant in reminding folks about Newton's transgressions: the purchase -- or outright theft -- of a stolen laptop and allegedly being involved in a pay for play scandal. To them, it shows that he's simply not worth the risk because a guy who commits those sorts of acts clearly is not a leader of men nor has the ability to become an elite QB at the next level. Now, the NCAA investigated and cleared Newton of the charges. Yet, the accusations linger. They hang over Cam and people's assessment of his abilities like a rain cloud. These posters accuse him without knowing the full story and refuse to believe he might be innocent because "he must be guilty!". This despite the fact the NCAA cleared him and pronounced him eligible.
See where this is going?
Ben was brought up because he too has been accused of committing crimes. Twice he's been accused of sexual assault. Those accusations, real or otherwise, hung over his head. They painted a grim picture of the man. Yet, there he was just a few short weeks ago, leading his team to its third Super Bowl birth during his tenure. Some would argue that sexual assault is a far more nefarious act than arranging a pay for play scandal or stealing a laptop. And if stealing a laptop or arranging a pay for play deal are insurmountable hurdles for a person to overcome on their way to being an elite QB as the Cam Newton detractors claim, then logic dictates that Ben couldn't possibly overcome his own baggage to become an elite QB himself. Right? But Ben is widely considered to be one of the league's elite QBs.
So how much do off the field issues really affect one's ability to play the game between the white lines? You could argue that it matters a lot. And you wouldn't be wrong. But Big Ben's most recent dilemma shows that maybe, just maybe, talent trumps everything.
Big Ben and Cam Newton have been compared physically countless times in the past few months. From their size to their arm strength to their scrambling abilities. Now it seems they both have off the field baggage in common as well -- real or not. So why then is it so outrageous to draw another comparison? Mind you, I passed no judgment on either. I merely pointed out that it's interesting to me that some of the same people who are denouncing Cam for his off the field issues would happily welcome Big Ben on the Bills.
It was an observation. One designed to promote discussion about Cam Newton. Which, after all, is the purpose of this thread. And, in the bigger picture, the purpose of TSW.
Once again, you're not reading what was written. Or failing to understand. I clearly stated that there were certainly counterpoints to the media blitz. So how is what I wrote any different than this first paragraph here? Besides being better written, more honest and thoughtful of course.
I'll spare you the suspense. It isn't.
But you're not interested in what was written. You're interested in what you think it means. You're not interested in having a discussion. You're looking to push your agenda. An agenda that has nothing to do with me.
Wait! Stop the presses! This is an amazing announcement WEO is making. Apparently -- you're never going to believe this -- apparently, the woman involved in the first allegation of sexual assault leveled against Big Ben ... get this ... KNOWS WHAT HAPPENED! :o Holy cow!!!! What a staggering feat of intelligence! Who would have ever imagined that one of the only two people to witness the alleged event knows what really happened?! I'm floored by that revelation. What other marvelous feats of logic do you care to share with the group? Surely an intellect capable of arriving at such a profound conclusion is wasted on us mere mortals.
And there's that word again: Rape. Yippee!!! This time it's in quotes. So it looks really official! I'm still not sure who you're quoting though, maybe it's the voices of the two monkeys fighting inside that melon on top of your shoulders. Either way, it didn't come from my posts. I refer you once again to this ...
More to the point, you again fail to comprehend what's actually being said. I brought up the charges against Ben because Ben was in fact charged with sexual assault. Twice. And, as I said, one was withdrawn. A point I made abundantly clear to those people who actually comprehend the written word. Thems the facts, my dear.
Ben's history was brought up specifically in reference to the charges against Cam Newton which -- like the charges against Ben -- were dropped. See how that works? I know that requires some digging into the subtext of the writing. It takes some effort. But I assure you, taking a moment to really understand someone's points, whether you agree with them or not, is worthwhile. Even if it's just to prove the other person is a jerk.
It's also worth noting that at no point in time did I pronounce judgment on either Ben or Cam. I simply pointed out a correlation between the two QBs and how they're perceived by some fans on this board. There's no agenda here other than to cut through the bull and focus on what matters most when it comes to evaluating Cam Newton's prospects in the NFL: his talent.
But you got all that, right? Because you were reading closely and being open minded. Right?
Of course you didn't. Because that's not your style. It's not what you do. You're simply a blowhard who is more interested in being "right" than having a frank and open minded discussion.
Instead, you jumped to numerous erroneous conclusions about a post -- which you clearly didn't take the time to read -- in order to force your own personal agenda onto the conversation. You misquoted, misunderstood and misinterpreted the entire post because YOU wanted to make it into something it's not. So much so that you followed this rant into a secondary thread which had virtually nothing to do with this one other than the inclusion of Big Ben. You wanted to be proven right more than you wanted to continue the discourse. That's what's called being intellectually dishonest.
So, again. Yeah. You need to read closer.
